193 

 Then we have : — 



Eucalyptus (Jecurva, F.v.M. {B.Fl. iii, 249). 



In statu typico a priori facile distinguitur, sed forniis iiitennediis variis eacum connectam esse 

 videtur. 



Vidimus fnitices 1-3 ni. alt. non nisi per distr. Stirling in arenosis sparsos floribus ochroleucis 

 hinc inde purpureo sutl'usis onustus in. Jul. ; pr. Warriup formam ad E. oleosam, F.v.M., vergentem 

 (I). 3,420), ad latera coUis. Suckey's Peak formam typicam (D. 2,989). (Diels and Pritzel, Engler's 

 Jahrh., XXXV (1905), p. 443.) 



In the above passage the form of E. decurva ( D. 3,420) stated to show transit 

 to E. oleosa is the true E. decurva, while the "forma typica" (D. 2,989), is really 

 E. falcata. 



If my readers will compare Plate 68, Part XV, Avith figures 1 and 2 of the 

 present Part, no further difiiculty will arise in the future as to the confusion of 

 E. decuroa and E. falcata. The trouble doubtless arose originally through some 

 mixing of specimens of what were at the time very rare species, a mixing that can 

 be readily understood by one who has been over the ground, since the two species 

 grow in the same localities, and the plants present a somewhat similar appearance. 

 The confusion originally arose with fruiting specimens — there is a more marked 

 difference between the buds. The filaments and anthers are different. 



2. With E. oleosa, F.v.M. 



Bentham {B.FL iii, 249) quotes Drummond's 6th Coll. 186 (in addition to the 

 type collected by Maxwell) as E. decurva, F.v.M. 



He also calls the same specimen E. tincinata, var. rostrata {B.Fl. iii, 216). 



I have (fig. 16, Plate 66, and p. 173, Part XV) stated that,, in my opinion, 

 Drummond's specimen is E. oleosa, var. glauca. It is this variety which presents 

 the closest similarity to E. decurva, but the buds and fruit are of a different shape, 

 and those of E. decurva are more drooping, while the anthers of E. decurva are not 

 closely related to those of E. oleosa, but have a greater resemblance to those of the 

 E. incrassata group. 



I have already referred to tlie fact that Bentham {B.FL iii, 249) refers certain 

 Murchison Ptiver specimens of Oldfiold to E. decurva, or rather states that they 

 "look like the same speci(>s." 



These specimens arc doubly unfortunate, for {B.FL iii, 253) they were 

 referred to E. foecunda also. They really belong to E. oleosa, and I have cleared 

 the matter up at p. 169, Part XV, while they are figured at 3a and 3b, Plate 22, Part 

 IV. 



I'hcy are iu fruit only, and the reference is pardonable enough. They are, 

 however, less pendulous, rather smaller, have the valves rather more exsert and the 

 styles more persistent ; the leaves are also more shiny than those of E. decurva. 



